A1(T) Elkesley Junction Improvements - Highways Agency
A1(T) Elkesley Junction Improvements - Highways Agency A1(T) Elkesley Junction Improvements - Highways Agency
11 Vehicle Travellers11.1 Findings at Stage 2 AssessmentThe section of the A1(T) within the study area passes through landscape of goodquality for most of the study length. The landscape assessment identified areasimmediately surrounding the A1(T) as Area A: Open undulating arable farmland andF: Enclosed arable farmland, both of good quality. The landscaper near the village isof poor landscape quality as characterised by occasional derelict commercialproperties.The Preferred Version will have a significant effect on views from the road, inparticular introducing elevated views from the proposed bridge for travellers crossingover the A1(T).Views of the landscape for users of the A1(T) would be interrupted by theembankments of the proposed grade separated junction if the Preferred Version isconstructed, although the users of the grade separated junction would have moreopen views of the landscape on its crest.The Preferred Version was found to alleviate current driver stress through, theremoval of gaps in the central reserve, closure of the field accesses and the provisionof the grade separated junction removing the conflict of local turning vehicles, havingan overall beneficial impact.11.2 Reason for Scoping OutAt Stage 2 it was determined that the Preferred Version would result in a similarimpact rating with regards to views from the road and driver stress. The PreferredVersion is anticipated to significantly reduce driver stress through the points raised inthe section above.It was therefore considered that there would be no significant impacts as a result ofthe proposals and that no further assessment is required.92
12 Road Drainage and the Water Environment12.1 IntroductionThis chapter describes and assesses the baseline conditions of the waterenvironment associated with the proposed A1(T) Elkesley Grade Separated JunctionImprovements Preferred Version.12.2 Statutory and Planning ContextThe following legislation and policy guidance has been referred where applicablewithin the text:• CIRIA Report 163, the Construction of Bunds for Oil and Storage Tanks 1997• Planning Policy Statement 25, Development and Flood Risk, Dec 2006;• Pollution Prevention Guideline 6 (PPG6) ‘Working at Construction andDemolition Sites’ (2002)• The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)• The Water Resources Act 1991• Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS25), ‘Development and Flood Risk’,(2006).• Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11 Section 3 Part 10HA216/06 Road Drainage and the Water Environment.Assessment MethodologyThe appraisal has been undertaken in accordance with DMRB Volume 11 Section 3Part 10 HA216/06 Road Drainage and the Water Environment. The method appliedto assessing the impacts on the water environment is predominantly based on a deskstudy approach combined with site information. The impacts on drainage have beenassessed by comparing existing drainage discharges with those proposed for thePreferred Version. This desk study approach includes:• ‘Screening’ the need for further assessment, and where required, defining the‘scope’ and form that the assessment should take.• Undertaking either a ‘simple’ and/or ‘detailed’ level of assessment todetermine and assess the impacts of the proposed scheme on the waterenvironment during the construction and operation;• Identifying any significant residual effects that remain post mitigation.12.3 Assessment of ImpactsFour methods are used to assess scheme impacts.93
- Page 41 and 42: Inclusion of an area within the vis
- Page 43 and 44: MagnitudeHighMediumLowNo ChangeDefi
- Page 45 and 46: • rolling landforms with numerous
- Page 47 and 48: associated with Jockey Lane forms a
- Page 49 and 50: • Properties along the High Stree
- Page 51 and 52: 7.5 Implication of New Lighting Pro
- Page 53 and 54: Area F: Enclosed Arable Farmland (G
- Page 55 and 56: Table 7.7: Summary of Impacts on Vi
- Page 57 and 58: Discussion of Impacts:Visual effect
- Page 59 and 60: • To optimise protection for resi
- Page 61 and 62: Detailed Mitigation ProposalsThe fo
- Page 63 and 64: 8 Land Use8.1 Findings at Stage 2 A
- Page 65 and 66: The frequency response of the human
- Page 67 and 68: oad traffic. It does not provide pr
- Page 69 and 70: The results of the Scoping Assessme
- Page 71 and 72: operations. If the total noise leve
- Page 73 and 74: Table 9.4 - Significance criteria o
- Page 75 and 76: noise levels are below 58 dB LA1(T)
- Page 77 and 78: climate for a typical day on the ex
- Page 79 and 80: identified receptors within the stu
- Page 81 and 82: presented are also based upon a 100
- Page 83 and 84: Operational PhaseTable 9.9 and Tabl
- Page 85 and 86: Table 9.11 - Predicted noise levels
- Page 87 and 88: Table 9.14 - Predicted number of dw
- Page 89 and 90: Air-borne vibration is more common
- Page 91: 10 Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestria
- Page 95 and 96: LowAttribute with a low quality and
- Page 97 and 98: Table 12.3 Criteria for Estimating
- Page 99 and 100: Table 12.5: Water Framework Directi
- Page 101 and 102: The greatest potential remains the
- Page 103 and 104: 13 Geology and Soils13.1 Findings a
- Page 105 and 106: Annex 4Figure 4.1 - Constraints Map
- Page 107 and 108: Annex 9Figure 3.1 - 3.9: Noise Cont
- Page 109: Annex 12Figure 12.1 - Groundwater V
12 Road Drainage and the Water Environment12.1 IntroductionThis chapter describes and assesses the baseline conditions of the waterenvironment associated with the proposed <strong>A1</strong>(T) <strong>Elkesley</strong> Grade Separated <strong>Junction</strong><strong>Improvements</strong> Preferred Version.12.2 Statutory and Planning ContextThe following legislation and policy guidance has been referred where applicablewithin the text:• CIRIA Report 163, the Construction of Bunds for Oil and Storage Tanks 1997• Planning Policy Statement 25, Development and Flood Risk, Dec 2006;• Pollution Prevention Guideline 6 (PPG6) ‘Working at Construction andDemolition Sites’ (2002)• The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)• The Water Resources Act 1991• Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS25), ‘Development and Flood Risk’,(2006).• Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11 Section 3 Part 10HA216/06 Road Drainage and the Water Environment.Assessment MethodologyThe appraisal has been undertaken in accordance with DMRB Volume 11 Section 3Part 10 HA216/06 Road Drainage and the Water Environment. The method appliedto assessing the impacts on the water environment is predominantly based on a deskstudy approach combined with site information. The impacts on drainage have beenassessed by comparing existing drainage discharges with those proposed for thePreferred Version. This desk study approach includes:• ‘Screening’ the need for further assessment, and where required, defining the‘scope’ and form that the assessment should take.• Undertaking either a ‘simple’ and/or ‘detailed’ level of assessment todetermine and assess the impacts of the proposed scheme on the waterenvironment during the construction and operation;• Identifying any significant residual effects that remain post mitigation.12.3 Assessment of ImpactsFour methods are used to assess scheme impacts.93
Change language